decision sent to author nature communications

decision sent to author nature communications

Next, we focussed on a potential institutional bias and looked at the relationship between OTR rate and institutional prestige as measured by the groups defined based on THE ranking explained above (excluding the fourth group, for which no THE ranking was available), regardless of review type (Table9). reparationstapet kllare . Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance. sean penn parkinson's disease 2021. korttidsminne test siffror; lng eller kort pipa hagel. We should note that the significance of the results on outcome is limited by the size of the dataset for accepted papers, due to the high selectivity of these journals and to the low uptake of DBPR. In the following analysis, we will refer to the data for groups 1, 2, and 3 as the Institution Dataset. 0000001568 00000 n P30 Lite Android 11 Release Date, Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the Manuscript Submission process should be sent to the Natural Product Communications editorial office as follows: [email protected], 614-786-1970. Carlsson F, Lfgren , Sterner T. Discrimination in scientific review: a natural field experiment on blind versus non-blind reviews. To obtain The dataset consisted of 133,465 unique records, with 63,552 different corresponding authors and 209,057 different institution names. JAMA. 0000012294 00000 n 0000002247 00000 n 1 Answer to this question. A list of links to the Manuscript Tracking System login pages for each journal is available on the Nature Portfolio Journals A-Z webpage. After manually checking a sample of gender assignments and their scores, we kept the gender returned by Gender API where the accuracy was at least 80 and assigned a value NA otherwise. Because of the small size of the data set for accepted papers and of the lack of an independent measure for the quality of the manuscripts, we could not draw firm conclusions on the existence of implicit bias and on the effectiveness of DBPR in reducing or removing it. Is double-blinded peer review necessary? 0000055535 00000 n . Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Article Tracking will guide you through the stages from the moment your article has been submitted until it is published. Authors of accepted papers will receive proofs of their article about 15 business days after the decision is sent. 2008;23(7):3513. 15 days You can make one of the following decisions: Accept, Revise or Reject. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. The author can request that the deadline be extended by writing to the editor in advance. . Cohen-Friendly association plot for Table5. 8. We also found that manuscripts from female authors or authors from less prestigious institutions are accepted with a lower rate than those from male authors or more prestigious institutions, respectively. The corresponding author does not need to be the first author . This may be due to the higher quality of the papers from more prestigious institutions or to an editor bias towards institutional prestige, or both. Especially the status 'Under review' encompasses many steps; while it may appear your manuscript is not progressing through the editorial process, a lot of activities may be happening during this part of the review process. The author is usually given a deadline of a few weeks to a couple of months depending on the nature of revisions and the field of study. On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. Author uptake for double-blind submissions was 12% (12,631 out of 106,373). 430,805 Altmetric mentions (2021), The Journal Impact Factor is defined as all citations to the journal in the current JCR year to items published in the previous two years, divided by the total number of scholarly items (these comprise articles, reviews, and proceedings papers) published in the journal in the previous two years. No, Modified on: Mon, 26 Jul, 2021 at 6:04 PM. Toggle navigation. Research Square converts the manuscript to HTML, assigns a DOI, and posts on the platform with a CC-BY license. Finally, we investigated the outcome of post-review decisions as a function of peer review model and characteristics of the corresponding author. Accessed 15 Jan 2017. 0000003064 00000 n On submission, authors should choose one or two referral journals, in the order of preference, or "no referral." BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. We observed a trend in which the OTR rate for both DBPR and SBPR papers decreases as the prestige of the institution groups decreases, and we tested for the significance of this. making DBPR compulsory to accelerate data collection and remove potential bias against the review model. Posted on 31st May 2022 by 31st May 2022 by Make the correction notice free to view. Does double-blind review benefit female authors? If you have no email from the journal and have already checked the spam folder of your mailbox, you may check if the submission . Roberts SG, Verhoef T. Double-blind reviewing at EvoLang 11 reveals gender bias. Because the median is not subject to the . Proc Natl Acad Sci. If you want to find out more about when to expect a decision from the Editor, click here. 2017;12(12):e0189311. This is a statistically significant result, with a small effect size; the results of Pearsons chi-square test of independence are as follows: 2=1533.9, df=2, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.147. In Review. 0000009854 00000 n Online First - Article available online 6. our vision is for all Springer Nature authors and reviewers to have an ORCID iD, and we are confident we will get there, slowly but surely. If you have previously submitted a paper to a Nature Portfolio journal and would like an update on the status of your submission, please login to the manuscript tracking account for the corresponding journal. 2007;18(2):MR000016. 0000047727 00000 n 0000002034 00000 n Timely attention to proofs will ensure the article is slated for the next possible issue. After review, Nature Communications rejected it because of reason X. You can useIn Reviewto access up-to-date information on where your article is in the peer review process. In the past if your work wasn't accepted in Nature or Science researchers would often try the respected general journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, or PNAS - which wags dubbed "Probably Not . Similar to the uptake case, the models do not have a good fit to the data. Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. That is, authors that feel more vulnerable to implicit bias against the prestige of their institutional affiliation or their country tend to choose DBPR to prevent such bias playing a role in the editorial decision. 9.3 weeks. The overall uptake of DBPR is 12%, corresponding to 12,631 manuscripts, while for 93,742 manuscripts, the authors chose the single-blind option. Papers from more prestigious institutions are more likely to be sent to review than papers from less prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. 2017-07-13 11:21. The process was on par with other journal experiences, but I do not appreciate the inconsistency between what the editor at Nature Medicine told me when transferring to Nature Comms, and the final evaluation at Nature Comms. The results of a Pearsons chi-square test of independence are as follows: 2=378.17, degrees of freedom=2, p value <0.001; Cramers V=0.054 and show that authors submitting to more prestigious journals tend to have a slight preference for DBPR compared to SBPR. Nature. The Editor may be reading and assessing the submission, assigning additional editors according to the journal's polices, or taking some other action outside of the system. statement and In order to test whether the proportions in different groups were the same, we used the test of equal proportions in R (command prop.test). Did you find it helpful? We used a significance threshold of 0.05. We only retained a normalised institution name and country when the query to the GRID API returned a result with a high confidence, and the flag manual review was set to false, meaning that no manual review was needed. The corresponding author does not need to be the first author . Editors need to identify, invite and get (often two or more) reviewers to agree to review. The post-review outcome of papers as a function of the institution group and review model (Table15) showed that manuscripts from less prestigious institutions are accepted at a lower rate than those from more prestigious ones, even under DBPR; however, due to the small numbers of papers at this stage, the results are not statistically significant. Are you sure you do not want to provide feedback? The available data cannot tell us if other factors, such as the quality of the work, play a role in the choice of the review model. We found that 10 countries contributed to 80% of all submissions, and thus, we grouped all other countries under the category Others. Accessed 15 Jan 2017. 0000047805 00000 n The author needs to submit the revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response to the reviewer comments. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Immediacy Index is the average number of times an article is cited in the year it is published. In the case of transfers, the author cannot change the review type compared to the original submission, and therefore, we excluded the 22,081 (17%) transferred manuscripts from the analysis of author uptake. The Alan Turing Institute, London, England, Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, Springer Nature, 4 Crinan Street, London, UK, You can also search for this author in This might be the result of editor bias towards the review model, of the fact that female authors select their best papers to be DBPR to increase their chances of being accepted, or both. (The FAQ has more details about the mechanics of how this works.). Please try your request again later. The outcome both at first decision and post review is significantly more negative (i.e. I am not a robot. These results suggest that the choice of DBPR may be linked with a higher perceived risk of discrimination, with the exception of gender discrimination. manuscript under consideration 40editor decision started. You have completed the submission and approval steps, and the article has been submitted to the journal. Hb```f``5g`c`} 6Pc. Brief definitions for each of the metrics used to measure the influence of our journals are included below the journal metrics. 2.2 The model of bounded rationality. GRID - Global Research Identifier Database. After peer review, a decision of accept, reject, or revision is made on the basis of the reviewers comments and the judgment of the editor. Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Tregenza T. Gender bias in the refereeing process? we could have chosen a different distribution of institutions among the four categories, and will likely have an impact on the uptake of DBPR across the institutional prestige spectrum. Note that once completed reviews for your submitted article have been received and are under evaluation by the handling Editor the status may later return to 'Under Review' if additional reviews are sought. EDR was the major contributor in writing the Discussion and Conclusions sections. We found that DBPR papers that are sent to review have an acceptance rate that is significantly lower than that of SBPR papers. national association of state directors of developmental disabilities service, how many years did juan carlos serve as king. The submission remains at this status until you select "Build PDF for Approval". Journal-integrated preprint sharing from Springer Nature and Research Square. In order to see whether author uptake could be accurately predicted based on author and journal characteristics, we attempted to fit logistic regression models to the data. 20000 characters with spaces), Research Articles (25000-40000 characters with spaces), . Several Nature journals (see list below) follow a transparent peer review system, publishing details about the peer review process as part of the publication (including the reviewer comments to. . Ross-Hellauer T, Deppe A, Schmidt B. BMcG collected the data from GRID and THE, processed the data, and conducted the statistical analysis. Therefore, in the DBPR case, we can conclude that there is a significant difference between the OTR rate of papers by male corresponding authors and the OTR rate of papers by female corresponding authors. 0000014828 00000 n The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.06, which means that the model only represents a 6% improvement over simply guessing the most frequent outcome, or in other words, the model is not powerful enough to predict the uptake of DB with high reliability. We did not observe gender-related differences in uptake. Chung KC, Shauver MJ, Malay S, Zhong L, Weinstein A, Rohrich RJ. We aimed at modelling uptake (baseline SB) based on the following variables (and all their subsets): corresponding authors gender, the group of their institution (1, 2, 3, or 4), the category of their country (Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea, the UK, the USA, and Others), and the journal tier (Nature, Nature sister journals, and Nature Communications). 0000006193 00000 n . Your new or revised submission has been sent back by the Editorial Team for changes prior to review. It was on December 21, 1968, that Apollo 8 launched from Cape Kennedy, in Florida, sending US astronauts Frank Borman, James Lovell Jr and William Anders on the world's . We divided the journals in three tiers: (i) the flagship interdisciplinary journal (Nature), (ii) the discipline-specific sister journals (Nature Astronomy, Nature Biomedical Engineering, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Cell Biology, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Chemistry, Nature Climate Change, Nature Ecology & Evolution, Nature Energy, Nature Genetics, Nature Geoscience, Nature Human Behaviour, Nature Immunology, Nature Materials, Nature Medicine, Nature Methods, Nature Microbiology, Nature Nanotechnology, Nature Neuroscience, Nature Photonics, Nature Physics, Nature Plants, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology), and (iii) the open-access interdisciplinary title (Nature Communications). Our results show that we cannot say that there is a significant difference between authors from prestigious institutions and authors from less prestigious institutions for DBPR-accepted manuscripts. EDR is employed by Macmillan Publishers Ltd, which publishes the Nature-branded journals. 2nd ed. Hope everybody's doing well. 9 0 obj << /Linearized 1 /O 11 /H [ 1335 254 ] /L 93263 /E 83910 /N 2 /T 92966 >> endobj xref 9 45 0000000016 00000 n The system will also immediately post a preprint of your manuscript to the In Review section of Research Square, in easy-to-read HTML, and with a citeable DOI. I submitted to Nature Neuroscience about 9 days ago and it's been "under consideration" for about a week. This decision is taken solely by the editors, who are aware of the chosen peer review model as well as all author information. The results were significant for all pairs: group 1 vs. group 2 (2=15.961, df=1, p value <0.001); group 2 vs. group 3 (2=7.1264, df=1, p value=0.0227); and group 1 vs. group 3 (2=37.304, df=1, p value <0.001). Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? We identify two potential causes for this, one being a difference in quality and the other being a gender bias. Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. Title page: A separate title page is necessary and should bear a) the title of the article, b) name of the authors, c) the institutions of origin, d) a short title and for Short Communications also the corresponding author's name, address, and e-mail.Please note that it should be a maximum of 5 authors for Short Communications. The Editor has recommended the submission be transferred to another journal, and your response is needed. 0000013595 00000 n Just select the In Review option when you submit your next article to one of the participating journals. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type. There . Locate submission instructions for a Springer journal, Submit a manuscript with your ORCID number, Submit a Nature Portfolio manuscript for Open Access publishing, Submit multimedia files to be published online with your article. Nature Communications: n/a: n/a: 6.0 days: n/a: n/a: n/a: Rejected (im.) We excluded papers for which the post-review outcome was a revision and papers which were still under review; thus, the dataset for this analysis comprises 20,706 records of which 8934 were accepted and 11,772 were rejected. 2017;6:e21718. 0000004476 00000 n This can potentially skew our results if, for example, there are differences in the proportion of names that cannot be attributed between genders. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts In these scenarios, crowd wisdom peaks early then becomes less accurate as more individuals become involved, explained senior author Iain Couzin, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. Among the studies dealing with institutional bias, an analysis of abstracts submitted to the American Heart Associations annual Scientific Sessions research meeting from 2000 to 2004 found some evidence of bias favouring authors from English-speaking countries and prestigious institutions [14]. 2023 BioMed Central Ltd unless otherwise stated. If authors choose DBPR, their details (names and affiliations) are removed from the manuscript files, and it is the authors responsibility to ensure their own anonymity throughout the text and beyond (e.g. Needs Approval or Revision Needs Approval. We employed a Wald test to evaluate the statistical significance of each coefficient in the model by testing the hypothesis that the coefficient of an independent variable in the model is significantly different from zero. My father emptied the thing at an unknown date ruining my spontaneous project, but at least I was able to recover the skull, jaw, spine & ribs. . This is because the Nature journals do not collect information on authors gender, and thus, such information can only be retrieved with name-matching algorithms with limited accuracy. "This is an extension of the wisdom-of-crowds theory that allows us to relax the assumption that being in big groups is always the best way to make a . Back to top. In a systematic review and meta-analysis of biomedical journals investigating the interventions aimed at improving the quality of peer review in these publications, the authors reported that DBPR did not affect the quality of the peer review report or rejection rate [4]. Accepted articles are automatically sent to the production department once the Editor has made a final decision of 'Accept'. One possible explanation for the lack of fit is that more or other predictors would be needed in order to fully explain the response, for example, a measure of quality, as we have already indicated. Article-level metrics are also available on each article page, allowing readers to track the reach of individual papers. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative. Includes a detailed report with feedback and, for journal manuscripts, publishing advice and journal recommendations based on our editors' detailed assessment of your findings. 0000062196 00000 n We have informational videos that pertain to our Journal Suggester and Transfer Desk that take about five minutes each to listen to if you are interested in learning more about them. 0000001335 00000 n A study of the distribution of gender among reviewers and editors of the Frontiers journals showed an underrepresentation of women in the process, as well as a same-gender preference (homophily) [10]. Journal Issue available online . Nature and Nature Communications are to follow in due course. If the article is published, the preprint is updated with a link to the version of record. (But be sure all your coauthors agree to opt-in, too.) As mentioned above and discussed below in more detail, the fact that we did not control for the quality of the manuscripts means that the conclusions on the efficacy of DBPR that can be drawn from this data are limited. 0000004174 00000 n How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380? Modified on: Thu, 30 Jul, 2020 at 4:54 PM. Real Cuban Link Chain For Sale Near Mumbai, Maharashtra, The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. In order to identify the pair(s) giving rise to this difference, we performed a test of equal proportion for each pair and accounted for multiple testing with Bonferroni correction. Linkping University. Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. ,.,., . Our commitment to early sharing and transparency in peer review inspires us to think about how to help our authors in new ways. The proportion of authors that choose double-blind review is higher when they submit to more prestigious journals, they are affiliated with less prestigious institutions, or they are from specific countries; the double-blind option is also linked to less successful editorial outcomes. Nevertheless, the available data allowed us to draw conclusions on the uptake of the review models, as we detail below. Corresponding author defined. Post Decision Manuscripts Decision summarynature. Renee Wever. Although each journal published by Cell Press is editorially independent, we have been using Editorial Manager, a manuscript tracking system that allows authors to transfer manuscripts along with any review comments they may have between Molecular Plant and Plant Communications.Should you have any questions about the . 2015;136(6):136977. 'Completed - Accept'. Nature Support Solution home Author and Peer Reviewer Support Submission Rejection of your paper / manuscript Modified on: Mon, 26 Jul, 2021 at 6:04 PM Springer is committed to your. As needed, the journal editors may also ask the committee to provide opinions on the policies and procedures of the journals. This reply will be sent to the author of the Correspondence before publication. The study reported on here is the first one that focusses on Nature-branded journals, with the overall aim to investigate whether there is any implicit bias in peer review in these journals and ultimately understand whether DBPR is an effective measure in removing referee bias and improving the peer review of scientific literature. Please let me know of your decision at your earliest . The analysis of success outcome at both the out-to-review and acceptance stages could in principle reveal the existence of any reviewer bias against authors characteristics. Authors must then complete the submission process at the receiving journal. Nature. Unfortunately, in light of the serious concerns raised by the referees, I regret that our decision must be negative, and we are unable to offer to publish your manuscript in Nature Communications.' Reddit and its partners use cookies and similar technologies to provide you with a better experience. In the out-to-review analysis, we observed a significant difference between the OTR rate of papers by male and female corresponding authors of DBPR papers. Moreover, the two models do not have to be exclusive;one could think of a DBPR stage followed by full public disclosure of reviewers and editors identities and reports. We did not find a significant association between gender and review type (Pearsons chi-square test results: 2=0.24883, df=1, p value=0.6179). Blank RM. Goldin C, Rouse C. Orchestrating impartiality: the impact of blind auditions on female musicians. 2016;1(2):1637. the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380?, Sorry we couldn't be helpful. More information regarding the release of these data can be found here. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. IP-address: 40.77.167.199. Article HUM6WEX:hQR{pe"3>g7`,. Help us to improve this site, send feedback. Finding reviewers who agree to deal with the paper - another week. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. Nature. https://www.grid.ac. waiting to send decision to author nature. 50decision sent to authorwaiting for revisionFigure 2 Article proofs sent to author 4. Press J to jump to the feed. Help us improve this article with your feedback. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 0000005727 00000 n I have a revised manuscript which I submitted to Nature Communications. Submissions not complying with policy and guidelines receive an immediate (administrative) reject and are not forwarded to the review process (IEEE PSPB Operation Manual, 8.2.2.3) Authors are required to ensure before submission that their manuscripts are in full compliance with the magazine's submission policy and guidelines as outlined below. The difference, however, is very small. But the confusing part is, is that the reviewer are now done with reviewing (Review completed) but the new status became apperently ''Manuscript under consideration". So, in October 2018, we added a new . Our aim was to understand the demographics of author uptake and infer the presence of any potential implicit bias towards gender, country, or institutional prestige in relation to the corresponding author. Ben Glocker (an expert in machine learning for medical imaging, Imperial College London), Mirco Musolesi (a data science and digital health expert, University College London), Jonathan Richens (an expert in diagnostic machine learning models, Babylon Health) and Caroline Uhler (a computational biology expert, MIT) talked to Nature Communications about their research interests in causality .

Sovereign Grand Commander Of The Supreme Council, Linden Accident Today, Michigan Disability Determination Services, Poodle Dynasty Texas, Sylvia Perez Daughters, Articles D